MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392397285 · doi:10.1109/toh.2024.3371389

Analog Position Estimation for Enhanced Stability and Fidelity of Haptic Systems

2024· article· en· W4392397285 on OpenAlexafffund
Leonam Pecly, Keyvan Hashtrudi-Zaad

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Haptics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTeleoperation and Haptic Systems
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEncoderRotary encoderIntegratorHaptic technologyComputer scienceHigh fidelityPosition (finance)Latency (audio)FidelityBenchmark (surveying)SIGNAL (programming language)Stability (learning theory)Control theory (sociology)SimulationEngineeringArtificial intelligenceBandwidth (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose three methods to compute low-latency analog position where two of them fuse encoder and rate gyro signals. While one method is based on gyro with bias correction using encoder information, the other one is encoder-referenced combined with a resettable integrator to minimize the staircase form of encoder signals. Experiments on a one degree-of-freedom haptic simulation system have shown that a low-latency analog position with an accuracy over 98% compared to the sampled encoder signal can be obtained. The analog position signals are then utilized to produce analog viscoelastic virtual environments to assess and benchmark the proposed methods through uncoupled stability and perceived fidelity tests. The results have shown that a virtual stiffness range larger than 400% can be obtained with enhanced fidelity compared to common digital implementations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on HapticsSame topicTeleoperation and Haptic SystemsFrench-language works237,207